Two thunderbolt ports you mean? Yes. That's how many PCIe lanes are available for their low end M1 chip. Still, that's a lot more external bandwidth than most people (especially the target for these) will need. You can "make" several USB 3.2 USB-C ports out of these if you need to.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
M1 Chip Beats GeForce GTX 1050 Ti and Radeon RX 560 for Graphics Performance
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And I can get the custom PC in a laptop under 6 lbs, with no fans? for $999?
Looks like it is limited to the vsync rate of 60hz/ 60fps. Should play a number of games quite smoothly I’d say!
And those GPUs have a much higher TDP than the M1. Imagine Apple scaling the M1 GPU to 16 cores and having a TDP under 50 watts.
My only caveat is that mobile benchmarks often do leverage FP16 (half precision) where desktop ones don't, and on a desktop it may be asked to do more FP32 work. But still, wildly impressive for a 10-30w integrated part, and you could as well say hey, FP16 is an advantage.
Add to that, at least 20 hours of battery life. The PC laptop that came closest to getting 20 hours of battery life was a Dell Latitude 9510 at 18:17, costs $1839.
The M1 is an SoC, doesn't require fans and has way less power consumption. As a CPU the M1 already was impressive. Now, however, as an integrated GPU it also seems to be impressive. Good job, Apple. 2021 is going to be interesting.
What do you mean it misses out on tessellation? Nothing was stated by me that it missed anything. We just don't know how it compares in a modern game and if it matches a with the same settings or if the GPU doesn't have something yet.
It would help to have benchmarks on current gen integrated graphics cards like the Intel Xe and AMD Vega 6 or 7. I know offhand that a gtx 1650 is much faster than the integrated Xe or Vegas.
No, they weren’t impressive at all. But you could plug in an eGPU.
This means the mac mini may not be suitable for certain use cases anymore. It’s curious how differently the mac mini has been positioned in the lineup through its iterations. Maybe we’ll see a more capable configuration once the M2/M1X/whatever they call their higher end chipset.
Also, regarding the article, it’s very impressive what they did with their first computer cpu, no matter how you look at it. Is it enough for all the purposes people use macs for? Not for a longshot. Will apple be able to deliver mac pro caliber performance with their more powerful chips? We’ll see, but this first chip is promising.
GTX1050ti and RX560 are bottom of the barrel discontinued cards that struggle even to get 30fps @ 1080p on some games. Base standard is RX5600XT for ~$220 or at the very minimum RX580 for ~$160 that has double the frame rates. A lot of people like me are upgrading from RX5600XT/RX5700XT to RX6800XT on 11/18/2020.
Last edited:
I'm sure the GPU will be discreet. Apple has never tried putting flashy colors on their internal parts. Whether it will be discrete, however...
My thoughts exactly. All the news/benchmarks coming out made me pull the trigger on a MacBook Air with 16gb of RAM to test it out to see if it can replace my big 16" MacBook Pro for development.
I appreciate that everyone is concerned with gaming performance concerning this new iGPU, but that's not really the biggest day to day boost for most people. The real boost for most people will be that their smaller Mac laptops will no longer choke on the simplest graphical draws.
My personal use case involves a 2018 i5 MBP, and just connecting it to an external 27" monitor caused all sorts of screen stutter and heating issues when running multiple Word docs on the screen. It was insane, and I ended up picking up an eGPU to resolve the problem and do some light (Warcraft 3 reforged, and Civ 6) gaming.
I should have never needed to take that step, and hopefully, the new M1 fixes these simple use case problems that Macs with iGPUs only have experienced in the past.
My personal use case involves a 2018 i5 MBP, and just connecting it to an external 27" monitor caused all sorts of screen stutter and heating issues when running multiple Word docs on the screen. It was insane, and I ended up picking up an eGPU to resolve the problem and do some light (Warcraft 3 reforged, and Civ 6) gaming.
I should have never needed to take that step, and hopefully, the new M1 fixes these simple use case problems that Macs with iGPUs only have experienced in the past.
I see it just the opposite. The M1 IS the great effort Apple has been over the last few years.
Sure. But what's the power draw on your PS 4 Pro? The M1 is around 10W and delivering over half the performance of those APUs—even for a four year old system that's a crazy performant leap. To put it in console terms, the M1 has the same power draw as the Nintendo Switch.
No one outside Apple knows how far they can scale the architecture but I'm sure that GPU can handle more than double the current cores.
So you are comparing an entire card, with dedicated on board RAM, and a slew of CUDA processors against the ENTRY LEVEL M1 Apple chip? Do you also compare a Tesla against a skateboard? I hope you are are that there will likely be an Apple M2, and perhaps other varieties of the M1 chip coming out soon. For a first release, I'd call this a Home Run
Very impressive. I was skeptical when I saw the charts without numbers but this looks promising
I've not been a Mac guy for sometime (last Mac was a 2008 iMac I think) but if development keeps up like this they might tempt me when I need a new laptop.
Haters can't complain they don't innovate anymore!
I've not been a Mac guy for sometime (last Mac was a 2008 iMac I think) but if development keeps up like this they might tempt me when I need a new laptop.
Haters can't complain they don't innovate anymore!